pcplantdb

[Stephanie Gerson <sgerson@stanfordalumni.org>]

Richard wrote:

"There is a design decision here, should cultivars be a plant in their 
own right (i.e. an instance of class Plant) or as in the pfaf db
as a set of properties depending on a particular plant.  I'd feel easier if
the Botanical Names and Common names each had their own classes. I think this
could be useful in the long term when we might want to expand the types of
name allowed, (say if we want to add a language for a common name, or if we
have a rose specalist who's  interested in forma). These also advantages if
the accepted name and the synonyms shared the same type. We may also end up
with a very heavy weight plant class with all the properties in it (hence
harder to modify). Splitting the plant class into a main container class which
have a number of smaller classes 
making up the whole could make for an easier object hiearachy."

Again, think functionality.  How can information be organized in the way that
it will be most easily understood and applied for the purposes of
Permaculture?  For example, if different cultivars will be understood/applied
as different plants, then yes, make them plants in their own right.

ya dig?
*Stephanie




        


+++++++++++++++
Stephanie Gerson
sgerson@stanfordalumni.org
(c) 415.871.5683


____________________________________________________________________